first?

I am starting my own firm. Kawk and Bulls

All of the v20 except Latham have to date been safe regarding deferrals, mass no offers, and mass first year layoffs.

Study kids so you don't have to take offers from TTTs that'll fuck you.

Dear Chadbourne associates never-to-be:

You seem confused by this turn of events, so let me explain.

When a firm defers your starting date but doesn't give you a starting date, that is the same thing as having your offer rescinded. Don't believe me? Think about it for a moment. Your situation right now could be expressed as follows: "At some point in the the future, you might work for Chadbourne, you just don't know when." You could say the same thing about any other firm that you currently don't have an offer to join. Try it: "At some point in the future, you could work for Cravath, you just don't know when." Now, repeat with the names of other firms until you grasp this basic principle.

For those who still don't get it, let me be perfectly clear: YOU HAVE JUST BEEN FIRED.

Close Elie, but not quite there yet... still reads "for firms are following"

Also I refuse to believe that even 30% of people out there would rather have their firm give them the bird

Uh, how about managing yourself well enough that you don't have to fuck people over.

These TTTs were hiring people for corp and finance AFTER strong indicators of a looming recession had appeared. The TTTs who run this TTT firm are incompetent. They should lay themselves off, or perhaps take Senator Charles Grassley's advice.

In practice, I'm not seeing any disadvantage that the Bird would have over the Fox. Even under the Bird, one may still seek other employment opportunities as if one was Foxed.

This is one of the least informative posts of all time on ATL. When were the incoming associates supposed to start? Which offices were impacted the most?

My peer firm Kawk and Bulls has not experienced layoffs, deferral, or salary cuts. Whether Kawk and Bulls can weather this economic storm only time will tell. I would hate to see Kawk and Bulls split.

The Fox is much better, with or without a "going-away present." The Bird can deny that your offer was rescinded if anybody asks, and it puts you in the position of trying to explain to other employers why you are applying for jobs after accepting one. They should understand, but that doesn't mean they will. My midlaw firm gave me a clean break last month, and while I wasn't happy, it beats getting strung along for several more months.

How you like me now?

You should of known when you summered at a firm that has a rock for its logo.

Commenter #5 is on the money. Those who have been "deferred indefinitely" have simply been told a euphemism for "you're fired." If this these words have been directed towards you, you are either an inbred or have failed to work sufficiently hard in life. Either way, I am obscenely rich and you soon will not be.

To all Chadbourne associates who were indefinitely deferred:

How does is it feel? I mean, you paid so much money, incurred so much debt, and spent so much time for law school hoping to get that $160k to start, and you almost had it. But it was yanked out of your grasp right as you were about to enjoy it. How do you cope?

How do you explain it to your parents, family, and friends? I mean, until a little while ago, they thought you were going places. Now, the only place you are going is moving back in with dear ol' mom and dad. How do you answer their questions? How do you tolerate their quizzical expressions, their sideways glances? How do you handle the awkward silence in conversation whenever the subject turns to work or career?

should have

To all Chadbourne associates who were indefinitely deferred:

How does is it feel? I mean, you paid so much money, incurred so much debt, and spent so much time for law school hoping to get that $160k to start, and you almost had it. But it was yanked out of your grasp right as you were about to enjoy it. How do you cope?

How do you explain it to your parents, family, and friends? I mean, until a little while ago, they thought you were going places. Now, the only place you are going is moving back in with dear ol' mom and dad. How do you answer their questions? How do you tolerate their quizzical expressions, their sideways glances? How do you handle the awkward silence in conversation whenever the subject turns to work or career?

5 and 14 made my reading this post worthwhile.

The ship be sinking...

It is amazing how many people (read: lawyers) are so bitter about their own lives that they feel the need to gloat when others have the rug pulled out from under them.

18- enough with the anonymous auto-fellatio JaKe, we get it- you think you are awesome.

15 just made my day. Accurately summarized the anxiety and self-despair endemic to many TTT attorneys here and elsewhere. Kudos!

And don't worry your pretty head; Jake Emeritus will be the same breadline as you whether he realizes it or not.

15/17 -

Wow. You have some real issues....seek help.

Come on, 20. Grow up. The law has been a bitter backbiting profession since before you were born, and will be still long after you're dead. We cannibalize our sick and injured. It is our nature. The deferred Chadbourne associates are fair game for us now, just like any other lawyer that is suffering.

And I am eating popcorn and waiting until the next law firm implodes and I'm going to point and laugh, laugh, laugh, at you all.

And you all will know the fear in 15.

Hey 21, check the ips you moron.

-18 (not 5, not 14)

So many TTTrolls today. Enjoy your unpaid internships with the state legislature. Enjoy your incredibly active ABA student divisions. Enjoy hearing the phrases, "where is that?" and "they have a law school?" every time you tell someone where you spent three years TTTrolling it up....

I lost my offer to a great firm and now I scratch myself all day. The only thing exciting that happens is when the delivery guy comes with lunch around 2pm to make me even fatter. Then the afternoon malaise is interrupted only frequest trips to various porn sites and listening to talk. At night, I live vicariously through the athletes on my tv screen. I find myself personally invested in every game. What a fucking loser I am.

Serious question.

Do you get deferral or forbearance if you have to move in your mom's basement?

~Laid off Chadbourne associate

But is the Bird plan providing a monthly stipend to keep you as a biglaw reserve attorney?

1 - ha. that was awesome.

Chadbourne is a miserable hole that has never treated its people well. Sorry to those who won't be working there, but it'll probably be the best thing that ever happened to ya.

26/18/14/5- checked, same IP for all 4 posts... now what?

Oh, almost forgot... moron! He he he, gotcha sucker.

Let us join in communal prayer for these terminated, I mean indefinitely deferred associates who are experiencing the effects of stillbirth with relation to their legal careers. Normally I would wish you well on the breadline but given that you have never worked, you are ineligible to become a sloth leeching on the public dole.

52% of young people are unemployed. You idiots should get off your lazy American asses and riot in the streets

Mystal, you are shaped like an egg.

AMERICA IS FUCKED PEOPLE

stock up on guns and canned goods and get to your bunker. punch a goldman executive on your way.

Elie

Do a story about leaving the country to avoid student loans. As a 3L with no offer, and no prospects, I would gladly take something outside the legal profession. I am seriously considering moving to Canada.

38,

I don't know if Canada is far enough to get beyond Sallie Mae's jurisdiction

can't believe Chadbourne lathamed the incoming first years

My advice to the indefinitely deferred is to learn to play a musical instrument while wearing uncomfortably tight trousers, or seek work in a local chapeau shop.

33 are you trolling? If not, how do you check the IPs of guest posts?

My preeminent firm Kawk and Bulls is accepting applications for attorneys wishing to practice law.

I hear a number of posters on biglawboard are contemplating a payday loan operation in Northern Europe. Rising 3Ls may want to consider this.

52% of young people are unemployed. You idiots should get off your lazy American asses and get older immediately in order to qualify for SSI and government health care. Also, the politicians will be terrified of you because you actually vote. They will give you anything you demand if you include (Member: AARP) in the email to your local congressman.

52% of young people are unemployed. You idiots should get off your lazy American asses and get older immediately in order to qualify for SSI and government health care. Also, the politicians will be terrified of you because you actually vote. They will give you anything you demand if you include (Member: AARP) in the email to your local congressman.

I really wish ATL would actually report on specifics of which offices where affected instead of simply raising fears and invoking responses through some half-a$$ pole to get comments and views. That is not reporting.

For all who are actually interested in what has been going on, a nice graph (kind of outdated) is available on link below. Would sure be nice of ATL to compile a list so we could compare and that way everyone wins. We get much needed info and ATL gets hits. Thats how it used to be when people came to this site and learned something new, not just recycled info from other sites or half-a$$ stories rushed and put together. Sorry for the ranting, but ATL used to be so good at reporting rather than info dumping.

See link

http://theshark.typepad.com/weblog/2009/03/all-the-depressing-info-we-could-find-on-your-future-all-in-one-place.html

42- you can't, he's trolling, and so is the guy he was responding to who challenged him to check IPs to prove that he was blowing JaKe, and that it was not the case that JaKe was blowing himself.

This is the end. ANYONE who currently has a vault offer needs to look for alternative employment. THERE ARE NO JOBS WAITING FOR YOU.

i absolutely love the whole partner emeritus thing....hahahah you are so just a 0L who has a thesaurus or some shit hahahhaha loooooser join the cluuuuuub

Inside news that Ropes and Gray will be deferring then rescinding within the next few weeks.

Take a step forward If you did well in law school, performed well in interviews, scored a summer associate position, and ultimately earned a biglaw offer.

Not so fast 5, 15, and 25. You are losers. Although ITE has knocked some of the winners down closer to your level, they will eventually rebound and succeed. You will still be surfing internet porn and posting your cut/paste crap on message boards.

This post is addressed to Commenter #50:

The fact that you believe a Thesaurus is necessary in order to use sophisticated words reveals more about your paltry education than it does about anything else.

Incidentally, you attend a non-peer, non-preeminent peer law school.

You idiots need to sue. Bring enough cases and we'll get some law on this. ChadbourneTTT will probably give you money to walk away.

This site really has sunk to fact-skimpy rumor mongering. Seriously, you call this a story with no specifics about offices affected, practice groups, criteria for making cuts, $ offered to those affected, etc?

@ 34 / Partner Emeritus:

Let us join in communal prayer for these terminated - I mean, "indefinitely deferred" - associates, who are experiencing the effects of stillbirth with respect to their legal careers. Normally I would wish you well on the breadline, but given that you have never worked, you are ineligible to become a sloth leeching on the public dole.

-- Now with proper punctuation and grammar. Seriously, what TTT taught you to write like that?

My apologies for the fallacious use of "peer" in post #53. I was dashing off to my Law Review meeting and only had 7 seconds to type the post. I hope you wretches will find it in you to forgive me.

Look at that deferral chart that 47 just posted a link to. Try to count how many firms have deferred associates until January 2010. Do you really think that the moribund legal market will pick up so much in 3 months that all those firms will feel safe bringing all those people on board?

Here's a newsflash: Very few of the people who think they are to start work in January 2010 will start then. They will be further deferred before then, or, as A&B and Chadbourne have now shown, simply fired. Those lucky few who do start will do so because their firms have fired enough associates to make room for them.

Biglaw is out of money, people. The party is over.

Does anyone have any real info on other firms that are planning on going down this road?

And please spare me, Deferred for Life and Scared 3L. I could go without your categorical pessimism.

Luckily most of the credits you earned in law school may be helpful in negotiating a 5k salary increase in social work or vcr repair. Mazel Tov!

I am so tired of this half-a$$ reporting by Elie (see comment 9). ATL sucks compared to how it used to be. Instead of reporting and giving specifics on which offices were affected, we get some retarded pole and a standard info dump to get hits and comments up. These days ATL either puts together some half ass story (usually Elie, rarely Lat) or copies and recycles some story someone else reported with little to no new info. Not going to rant anymore but for those who remember how good the blog used to be, its frustrating to see what its become.

If anyone is interesting in getting a picture of how these deferrals and revoking of offers is taking form, see graph in link below. Its a little outdated and would be nice if Lawshucks or ATL provided the graph with the new updates but not holding my breath.

http://theshark.typepad.com/weblog/2009/03/all-the-depressing-info-we-could-find-on-your-future-all-in-one-place.html

Agree, 59. Those two (probably the same guy) need to stop with the whining/negativity....it makes all of us look bad.

GP announced its January start date last week (after months in the dark) - January 11, 2010 - next 5K advance due to arrive in a few weeks. woo hoo (finally).

This comment is addressed to post no. 56.

I find it distasteful to repeat my academic accolades and prestigious pedigree since we are talking about events that took place over 4 decades ago. Unlike you, I don't live in my past and I don't let things such as law review membership from 43 years ago define who I am today. However, bravo on your ability to correct me as I type these posts on the fly. Perhaps you can turn your "stellar" editing skills into a job that will provide you with a wealthy and comfortable lifestyle.

Hanging Chads are rolling stones gathering no mas.

It's one thing to not offer people employment. Stringing them along for more than A YEAR, during which almost their entire loan forbearance period has expired, is evil.

During this year all of these people could have found satisfactory employment. It would not have been at 160K--or whatever unknown amount Shitbourne cut to--but it would have been satisfactory. Now, though, these people are screwed.

The importance of reliance from 1L contracts class really hits home when a firm fucks people out of the most important year of job searching that they would have had in their careers. The entire 3L year to search has been screwed out of these people.

ABANDON HOPE ALL YE WHO ENTER HERE

Is Chadbourne committing in writing to bringing on the indefinitely deferred associates from its 2009 class before bringing on any associates who will graduate in later years? If not, then you have just been fired Chadbourne deferrees!

Where's the dow is up guy when you need him, huh?

Chadbourne & Parke to ... off the V100!

What percent of firms in the chart from 47's post will actually start their incoming associates on time and not lay them off within 6 months? I'm guessing 20-25%.

Chadbourne is a fucking TTT.

Only shit firms have been doing this shit. No V20 besides LaTTTham has mass layoffed first years or rescinded offers.

We need a Hall of Shame website to memorialize the TTTs that have fucked young and would be associates so future recruits will no who didn't stand by their people when things got tough.

I guess ol' Chadbourne's tobacky gravy train ain't what she used to be. Bet they wish they'd leased office space in some anonymous Park Ave. South tower more befitting their station rather than shelling out a premium for 30 Rock every month.

20-25% sounds fairly optimistic. Recent grads with deferred offers may be best off calling their firms and seeing if they can get out of any obligation so they can look for a new job without having to explain their situation. It's better than sitting around for several months to a job that will never exist or alternatively starting and then getting the axe within 2 months.

I really hope those affected have not locked themselves into a lease in the brutal New York, D.C., or L.A. real estate markets. Getting out of that commitment can be sticky.

Also, I hope that they really want to practice law in whatever state they took the bar exam for, and also that they have family or other support networks in that state who can provide meals and a place to crash as they now begin to look for paying employment.

The sheer arrogance of many of this blog's commenters is so preposterous that even the ancient Greeks probably did not have a word for it. Graduates of "elite" schools--a euphemism for institutions that provide no meaningful education (albeit a meaningful degree...) to a slew of trust-funded delinquents in common sense--caused the recession as a general matter, and created a "business" model of excess and unsustainability in the legal profession as a particular matter. You have rightly bled under your own knives; what are the now-bankrupt BigLaws if not the tombs and sepulchers of modern-day tyrants.

My only regret is that the victims of "indefinite deferrals" are invariably those few elite school graduates who weren't created with aristocratic sperm and actually understand what it is like to have to work for those BigLaw jobs. I truly sympathize with you few, for the powers that be have preserved the incestuous cycle of Ivy League anti-meritocracy.

How odd that the haughtiest among the ethically-challenged will continue to degrade others for a lack of work ethic while self-delusionally claiming an entitlement to evade the armageddon they scripted. You megalomanics have killed more economic lives than every serial killer combined, and yet still, by grace of nepotism, elitist power structure, and a cloak of self-dealt legal immunity, are able to escape the prison cells you deserve.

And just to preempt the typical neanderthal response of sour grapes by first-tier-trashites (FTTs), I have a degree from your "elite" school, and I work at a BigLaw. The difference is, I know that a J.D. and a cushy job do not polymorph me into a god.

We need a running list of firms, ranked by vault, that have started on time, deferred, and further deferred (probably fired) class of '09ers. Every Vault firm should be listed, and we will have one big list of glory and shame. Obviously, all the peer firms that have started on time have accrued themselves glory. The pretenders who honor their commitments will be ok. Those like Chadbourne, A&B, Arent Fox, et al, are the list of shame. Notice, so far, that except for Baker all the promise breakers are Vault garbage.

Perhaps someone who knows how to anonymously host a web page, which I do not, would be so kind as to do this.

Agree with 76. Too many douches on this site like to say that it's just business and these firms owe you nothing-as if you're a piece of garbage to be discarded and not a human being. These champions of business are also people who have been insulated from the real business world their whole lives through family connections.

Since their employment offers don't seem all that solid, can they change their slogan from "solid"? How about "liquid" or "gas".

I'd be deucing in my knickers right now if I were a recent grad.

Where are the PHJW trolls, those people are good for a laugh on a cool fall afternoon.

JaKe, your posts are three minutes apart. Short meeting, or are you just not on a journal?

76/78

What you are failing to see is that the "entitlement" and "happy you're failing" posts are coming from TTT students/grads that will never work a day in Biglaw. This is their way of sticking it to us....

I could care less about where people go to school or where they work - everyone is deserving of respect - but people who mock others should be ashamed.

77 -

The good people at Law Firm Chaos have put together a comprehensive chart that outlines how the firms have handled the (initial) deferrals: http://lawfirmchaos.blogspot.com/2009/03/deferral-summary.html

Of course, this list will have to be updated to reflect the most recent wave of re-deferrals/revocations, but it's a great start.

I heard that a 113 year old woman just qualified for Medicare funded breast implants. She wants to die looking like Pam Anderson.

Wake up you 20 and 30-somethings. Stop letting old people drain our treasury. Start voting and maybe old people will start dying again.

80 = chick from Boston.

Odds on November start dates?

76 FTW!

I think most firms are giving incoming associates "the bird."

Or "the fox" minus the 20k.

Everybody, this is temporary. Let the haters enjoy their moment of schadenfreude. In a few years, Biglaw partners will have needs to fill and firms (and their partners) will be back to kissing your asses. Meanwhile, all those lateral openings will require "strong academic credentials," which is the same code for grades/school/law review membership that it's always been. So you'll be able to leave the chortling TTTs behind and resume your place in the legal hierarchy. In the meantime, both partners and toileteers will enjoy the moment, and you might as well let them.

-- elitist (but correct) douchebag

Thanks Deferred for Life,

-77

51- sources? TTTrolling?

Just did a callback with them for their 2010 summer class (which, by the way, why are you having one if you can't even take on those you already hired) and am guessing I shouldn't expect to hear good news there.

94

EXACTLY. what are these firms doing rescinding offers and firing half their first years four months in with no work, then interviewing for summer positions?

spitting in the faces of the people they've fucked; that's what.

Eli, can you update this when you get some actual F-ing information?

I got laid off and now I have a small law job paying 100k.

Usually, this job would go to a TTT, but since I took it, it's no longer available.

The gloating TTTs are too TTT to realize that with us out of biglaw they won't be able to get ANYTHING.

No deferrals at:

Williams & Connolly
Boies Schiller
Munger
Irell

It's brutal out there for the TTTers. Public defender jobs here pay about 37k, less than a garbageman, yet these offices are getting more resumes than they can deal with.

SCHULTE ROTH & ZABEL has yet to give out start dates......the next firm to rescind??

98, add Kasowitz Benson to your list.

51 -

Please. As a R&G associate, I know how tight lipped the firm can be about anything and everything. So . . . unless you're a partner w/ recruiting responsibilities, you haven't a clue. And you're not. So you don't.

This site is so frustrating sometimes . . .

Note to firms - Be honest with your incoming first years and recently offered/yet to even hear summer associates and tell them what's going on. Get the bad news out earlier and let recent grads move on. Don't string them along, you're just hurting their future.

91,

WIll times ever be better than they are now? Of course they will. But that does not mean a return to the boomtimes, or even anything close to it, is in the offing. That is because there are simply too many lawyers for the existing work. Furthermore, there is no signs that the supply of future lawyers will decrease (admissions are up, in fact). Thus, even a significant pick up in work may not reduce the excess capacity in the profession to the point where average wages rise, and they may certainly not rise on an inflation adjusted basis to their boomtime highs anytime soon.

A key question here is "how long will it take for the current excess capacity in the legal profession to be eliminated by virtue of degradation of interest or skills?" Or, more simply, how long will it take for the numerous unemployed lawyers to move on to other careers/jobs or simply lose any marketable skill that a firm would want? If the excess of legal labor is not cleared quickly, then once the economy improves, then the currently unemployed lawyers will rush back into the profession and depress wages. If those currently unemployed lawyers can't come back (because they have moved onto other jobs or have lost skills due a long absence from the profession that law firm deem necessary), then perhaps things will get somewhat better for the "working lawyer." But, regardless, the outlook for the currently unemployed lawyer in either scenario does not look good. It would be interesting to hear some thoughts on how long it takes an unemployed lawyer to give up on the profession and truly move on. For some reason, I bet its a long time.

By the way, I agree with you that being in the true cream (eg, Harvard, Yale, etc) will probably help. (Although one wonders. Law firms have gotten a good long taste of what would be called TTT grads on this board, and still seem to keep hiring out of those schools. Perhaps the allure of all but the very high end has been broken for many employers.) But for most, even at very good schools, the returns on the numerous extra dollars spent on tuition at those schools will be marginal indeed.

104 -

There are many factors at play in long term planning. The more thoughtful firms are implementing stop-gap measures to minimize short-term losses (e.g. year long deferral programs for incoming first years, accelerated performance based reviews for current associates, etc.).

They are also implementing mid-term growth strategies. Firms with a reputation for value based pricing are trying to reap the rewards of that reputation (e.g. Ropes & Gray, Sidley, Paul Hastings). Firms that were not known for their value based pricing are trying to develop that reputation (e.g. O'Melveny).

They are also implementing long-term growth strategies. This, believe it or not, is the MOST IMPORTANT issue facing many firms: The current partners are getting older . . . too many of them. We're going to be facing this problem in many different industries, but in none so acutely as the legal industry. Older partners will retire and take with them their expertise, their networks, their wisdom, and their management skills. Truly thoughtful firms are focusing on developing solutions to this problem. It will potentially be the downfall of more firms than this current economic downturn.

-your resident legal industry consultant.

105, you mention O'Melveny. What do you think they'll do with their incoming first year class? They are slated to begin December 1. How do they fit it into developing this new reputation?

iF THERE ARE ANY DISAPPOINTED ASSOCIATES SEEKING EMPLOYMENT IN THE CALIFORNIA HIGH DESERT EMAIL XEPA826@HOTMAIL.COM

94 here again-

Thinking about this, I suppose if a firm is deferring associates they have already hired and yet they are continuing to interview for summer programs they should not have if there is no business, I can only conclude one of two things:

1. they realize they can get summer associates with better grades/pedigree than what they have hired from the summer of '08 class they are now deferring and would rather get rid of the less desired now and hold out two years for the summers of 2010 to graduate. In which case, fuuuuuuuuck them. What do they do in two years when business picks up and all those overqualified chadbourne associates flee to better firms because they can lateral into the firms they wanted to begin with? Terrible business move.

2. They have absolutely no concept of how to run a business, in which case, everyone is better off not going there.

I haven't worked with O'Melveny, so I don't know their plans. Of course, if I had worked with them, I couldn't tell you.

I can say this: Their attempts to develop a value reputation and their handling of the incoming class are two independent matters. One has nothing to do with the other.

Importantly for current students and those 2009 graduates, it seems that other firms will now be following the same strategy of firing a good portion of the "incoming associate" class. Will they base this on performance over your summer? Charm? School? or maybe all of the above.

In any case, my point is that this type of news will dominate the legal blogosphere for the next weeks and perhaps months.

Good luck!

110 -

I think the firms are cutting the incoming class based on (i) summer reviews, and (ii) which practice groups want them. So if no practice group wants you, because you didn't make a strong impression over the summer and beyond, you are in trouble. If, on the other hand, you are sought after by numerous practice groups, you are golden.

Just my opinion....

110 -

If that truly becomes the case, the legal industry is in worse shape than anyone originally thought or currently thinks. To de-offer substantial percentages of the incoming class would be to tell the world, "Our law firm is bordering insolvent." That's what some people currently think about Arent Fox, Alston & Bird, and now, likely Chadbourne as well.

The problem with these firms, though . . . they don't have much of a national niche. They're dime-a-dozen generic biglaw firms . . . and they're getting lost in the shuffle.

By the way - something similar happened to Fish and Richardson. They had a nice - an obvious niche. They were a go-to IP powerhouse. Then they decided they wanted to do more . . . and they completely destroyed their brand. Who is advising these people?

Of course, if one of the big boys (Skadden, S&C, etc.) leads the way, it could very well be open season. The market knows enough about the financials of these guys, they can do whatever they want without revealing anything substantially new.

this is my last callback outstanding. FML.

advices?

Simple, 113. If you get an offer, and it's your only offer, take it. Worry about next fall when next fall gets here, but keep your foot on the gas in the meantime. Lots of $ this summer and no job next year is better than working for free this summer and no job next year.

do you think there is any chance they will give any offers?

--113

Why did this firm spend money sending people to law schools during fall recruiting season?

112, 110 here again. I tend to disagree with your perspective. Your line of argumentation was precisely the same kind of commentary many of us would have made prior to the massive wave of deferments for incoming associates. Why should it be any different now? I can think of at least a handful of solid firms that decided to go ahead and defer simply because they don't have much work at the moment to throw at the new kids.

Now again, why wouldn't a firm fire or de-offer a good chunk of their classes if it is a more business savvy thing to do? Surely people like in-house at a number of banks and companies would welcome this news (apropos of this mornings comments regarding in-house counsel suffering at large banks).

I want to be optimistic, I really do, but I don’t see the gravy train anywhere.

If the update info is correct, this really isn't so bad. $60K makes the situation a heck of a lot less miserable.

83 - 'respect' is earned; 'courtesy' is deserved.
F all the silver-spoon, trust fund brats.

117/112,

I don't think I'm being optimistic. I'm being singularly pessimistic.

First, law firms are generally like sheep. No one moves until the herd starts moving . . . that is, unless they have to. Just like earlier in the year, we needed to see some of the bigger firms with plenty of cash on-hand start deferring before we realized it was safe to do so. Furthermore, fewer people questioned the move because work slowed down everywhere. Currently, there are many firms where work has picked up to an acceptable level. As a firm, to say that you are still so slow you can't take on new people would be to say that you weathered the downturn poorly relative to many others. You don't want to say that unless you have to.

Something tells me that several more firms will, unfortunately, have to. I don't think it will be most. But we will see at least a few more stories like this one.

105,

Do you really think that departing senior partners will reduce the supply of lawyers to the point that average wages will rise in the legal profession? That seems like a stretch to me.

I realize, of course, that the Grim Reaper will eventually pry the cold dead hands of even the most determined partner off of his book of business, but that sort of attrition seems long in coming, to say the very least. However, my observation is that senior partners are hanging on even more tenaciously than ever seen before, probably as a result of significant declines in the market value of their retirement assets and a failure to sufficiently scale down living expenses. The geezers are going nowhere anytime soon, and the firms are too afraid of losing business in this climate to force them out.

Maybe in 15 years or so, yes, you will be right and they will be gone, but that is too far out for all but the youngest on this board to really care about.

104

119 -

Respect should not be earned. It should be granted the natural state of affairs until a persons actions demonstrate he no longer deserves it.

83 is right, though. Mocking others is one of the basest of human behaviors. You might be able to learn something about civility from some of those "silver-spoon brats" you are so quick to mock.

-not a silver-spoon brat, but with nothing against them, either.

121, the old coots can't hold onto their books forever. Which is not to say that anyone reading this board is going to take them, but junior partners can. Firms that are too deferential to septuagenarians who don't know when to leave will be the first to get hammered when things begin to turn around.

121,

105 here. I said nothing about retiring partners elevating the wages of more junior attorneys. What I'm talking about is the catastrophe that will ensue if firms don't prepare for their transitions. The most pressing preparation is to ensure a smooth flow of able lawyers into the ranks of partnership (the current classes may have it rough now, but they will be the likely beneficiaries of an increased need for partners). Another pressing issue is to prepare for more risk and uncertainty in cash flows as work gets shifted around the legal industry wildly. Not only are partners going to be retiring, but clients (GCs) are going to be retiring as well. The next crop of leaders will be the X'ers. Talk about uncertainty!

Speaking of which . . . there's going to be an increase in demand for legal industry consultants in a few years. Perhaps that's a career path for some unemployed JD/MBA types.

There's rather strong evidence that people who lose their jobs during a recession or enter the work force during one, over their lifetime, earn less money that otherwise. Too bad.

125 -

There's also rather strong evidence that some of the most innovative and successful companies are formed during a recession.

We lawyers sure are a cynical bunch, no?

"We lawyers sure are a cynical, no?'

Shouldn't you be in synagogue?

126,

What does that have to do with lawyers, who are usually some of least innovative and interesting people in the population? Most of the people losing their jobs in the industry are content with having others dictate their work lives and will migrate to lower-paid positions as the industry contracts. There is no guarantee that any of them will ever work in biglaw again or will ever earn the salaries available just a few years ago. Fewer still will have the gumption to "form" a company of their own, and of those even fewer will be successful, so I fail to see the point you were making.

126 is right. Most of the creative and innovative people..and people who can sell products are doing something else...only the most annoying people in the population enter law...i Know very few lawyers who are not very annoying...these aren't attractive confident people you see in the movies...they are obnoxious...zero charisma...ugly usually

Lawyers aren't as dumb as you seem to think.

nobody said they were dumb

@ 34/64 - Partner Emeritus -

If true (which I doubt), that may explain your poor punctuation. (However, I do note that for something you profess to write "on the fly," your posts are very lengthy and detailed).

Nonetheless, your instinctive use of the phrase "with relation to," instead of "with respect to," is conclusive evidence of a subpar education and a plebian pedigree. You are what you profess to despise.

Agree with 131; this has nothing to do with intelligence. Plenty of smart people are being fired, but it appears that plenty are starting to spread the delusion that when the economy picks up, the status quo will be restored. There is simply no evidence that this will happen. What's that saying: "Hope for the best, plan for the worst."

Get whatever position you can, do it well, but don't sit on the hope that someday you're going back to biglaw. It may never happen, and you'll just end up disappointed.

exactly 133. Lawyers are smart for the most part. What they are not necessarily is innovative. All of that left brain work being logical, analytical, and detail oriented goes right out the window. Today's challenges may require more right brain creativity, problem solving. Sure you can ace the LSAT - but if the system fails can you figure out how to survive?

-131

I don't think things are going to return to the status quo, if "status quo" means "like 2006." I do think things are going to improve; that there are likely to be changes in how this (and every other) business operates; and that there will be opportunities for young lawyers to exploit those changes and profit over the course of the next decade or so. Assuming that they are willing to take some risk and show some initiative, which many will not.

Congratulations to the Chadbourne & Parke never to be associates! If ATL is to be believed, you are getting $60,000 to fuck off. That is a lot of money to pay someone just to sit around and mope while they absorb all the intricacies of daytime television. For the people presently working at Chadbourne & Parke, this payout endangers your own financial security because nothing productive came out of the expenditure. We take from one to give to another and in the end everyone goes down. To the managing partners at Chadbourne & Parke, pity is never a proper motivation to run a business much less a law firm; so shame on you for giving any money to people who have never worked a day in their lives. And instead of deferring people indefinitely, you should just cut them loose and tell them that it did not work out.

Kudos again to everyone. I say, people are finally coming to terms with reality.

Did C&P's Fall Recruiting go on as planned? Has anyone accepted an offer for a SA Position for Summer 2010?

Did Chadbourne's 2009 Summer Associates hear about offer status yet?

137-

I had a callback in the NYC office and they seemed confident they were having a class. I have not heard back regarding an offer yet, but it seemed to me they were making them already on a rolling basis. I suppose they assume by 2011 or 2012, business will be back to normal or working in that direction. So why pass up the chance to hire students they wouldn't get in a normal year b/c we'd be going to T20 firms.

139,

I think a lot of firms are no longer looking just towards school pedigree and more towards actual skill, commitment, connections to the area, etc.

I don't believe all T10 kids are elitist, entitled douchebags. But I do believe a lot more of them are then other schools. Do you want the kids who are gonna leave in 3 years to a better firm, have a trust fund and don't care about work, etc. Or the kids that want to practice law and work hard.

In terms of future business connections, etc. Let's think real hard about this. Other than some kids whose daddy's play golf and have boring banker connections, etc. The real big new companies always arise from the different, innovative, driven kids. The kids who didn't grow up with a silver spoon in their mouth. The kids who went to MIT on a scholarship for a perfect SAT score and created some new computer/gadget/software that's the new facebook/google/apple.

I get the connections with banking, wallstreet, etc. But in many law practices: real estate, IP, contracts, M&A, etc. the pedigree isn't gonna get you the future connections. It's the kid from Penn State who was in the computer club whose buddy invented the next internet. At least that's my thought.

Young lawyers are fucking douchebags that care only about status but ultimately know very little that is of use. They simply have a "license". Nobody who gets this license knows how to practice law so why do we license this way? The license is not a way of assuring a competent practitioner but rather it is used by provincial TTT to keep competitors' grubby little hands off their PI cases.

With rescissions ahead, I wonder what recent grads have been doing in the meantime, and what they plan to do the next few months before their start date/rescission?

Chadbourne also gave some cold offers to the class of 09 which they later rescinded and made no offers soon as it was obvious no one would call them on it. Who knows if the associates will ever see any of that stipend which they conveniently don't begin to pay until feb. Their word is questionable at best.

Plenty of no-offers to 09 summer class, decisions were made at the beginning of August.

What about pay cuts? Why not start associates on-time, but reduce pay drastically, say to 100K?

145 -

Because that would require smart, nimble law firm managers.

Those newbie attorneys got treated a lot better than any of the support staff ever did. Support staff is lucky to get any severance or 4 weeks at best at most places, even after years of working, while newbies continue to collect fairly large checks for doing absolutely nothing. I feel bad for the newbies, I don't like anyone to suffer, but they are being treated better than the rest of us.